Transcription

1 Master s thesis, M.S. Human Resource Management The Order of Hierarchy Ragnar Anthony Gambrell Supervisor: Gylfi Dalmann Aðalsteinsson Co-Supervisor: Tjörvi Berndsen Faculty of Business Administration School of Social Sciences University of Iceland February 2012

2 The Order of Hierarchy Ragnar Anthony Gambrell Master s thesis, Human Resource Management Supervisor: Gylfi Dalmann Aðalsteinsson Co-Supervisor: Tjörvi Berndsen Faculty of Business Administration School of Social Sciences University of Iceland February 2012

3 The Order of Hierarchy. 60 ECTS final thesis to the completion of an M.S. degree at the Faculty of Business Administration, School of Social Sciences, of the University of Iceland 2012 Ragnar Anthony Gambrell This thesis or parts of it cannot be reproduced without permission of its author. Printed: Háskólafjölritun Reykjavík,

4 Foreword This thesis, The Order of Hierarchy, is submitted for completion of an M.S. degree in human resource management at the Faculty of Business Administration, School of Social Sciences, of the University of Iceland. This thesis comprises 60 ECTS and has been supervised by Gylfi Dalmann Aðalsteinsson as lead supervisor and Tjörvi Berndsen as cosupervisor. 4

5 Summary Development seeks an unattainable end, save in death, namely completion. In development, a thing is fulfilled by its own principle, formed in determinable stages by its own nature as pre-determined in the source. A common analogy is the tree, sprung from the seed. Yet the analogy of the tree is too simplistic; for it merely explains a positive non-interrupted period of development; it does not explain what in fact defines development, namely conflict and revolution. In the long run, though, the negative forces of development are not destructive forces, in the light of the ultimate end of development; on the contrary, they actually bring about the change whereby the ultimate end may be achieved, or, rather, approached. In essence, development is a constructive serial process, furthered by conflict and fulfilled in stages through revolutions. On this notion of development, every tool is made, every industry is based, every organization, institution, and society is founded. What is perceived in nature, is constructed in human society. This is the order of hierarchy. Whereas the end is conceived in the beginning, the process of construction entails a direction whereby the end comes back to the beginning, in manifestation of the source, through determinable stages of development. In nature, direction is determined by nature herself; in human society, someone or something has to determine direction and someone or something has to lay the path. The idea is posited in advance; and purpose of the process is realization of the idea. The determinant of direction holds power of authority. By the decree of a determinant, movement is directed in terms of a ruling idea, the substance of which is to be fulfilled in the process. Yet the ruling idea invariably fails to grasp the principle by which development proceeds; and therefore a number of determinants compete in claiming the idea by which movement shall be directed. In failure of the ruling idea, a novel idea succeeds in substitution of this idea. Novelty is, however, merely justified in terms of substantive divergence; in form, it is the same system of logic, in pursuit of the same end on the same path. Substance is determined by authority, recognizing truth as such. Development does not proceed essentially by 5

6 substance, but determination of authority, by the decree of which an idea is recognized as truth and thus a ruling notion. Truth does not come forth unforeseen; it is determined as such in direction of movement. 6

7 Abstract Organization, as perceived in nature, exhibits a form of hierarchy. The form of hierarchy is, then, represented in the establishment of human organization and social structure. Society is, essentially, based on a hierarchic order of relation, established in representation of a form of hierarchy perceived in nature. Organization, particularly in the domain of the intelligent being, is not a fixed structure; it operates, rather, in a state of development. To unravel the inherent structure of development is, therefore, likewise to come to an understanding of the structure of organization. A status-based order of relation is only one representation of a variety of representations of a structure of organization. A hierarchic structure is, further, not necessarily only or best represented by a status-based order of relation, as may, however, be assumed in comparison to the ant colony, and such. Organization, as an order of hierarchy, is, rather, defined in terms of its structural development. In development of organization, certain stages may be determined in achievement of ends in fulfillment of the principle on which organization is based. Through these stages, organization manifests as a whole. The principle of organization is, in fact, the whole as such; and in gradual manifestation of the whole, the principle is affirmed. In fulfillment of the principle, the whole is unified. In opposition to the unified whole, the individual stands in affirmation of its own will and self-interest. The interest of the whole is the general will of all its members, as defined by the principle of the whole. The principle of the individual and the principle of the whole are irreconcilable. In affirmation of the principle of the whole, the principle of the individual is negated. In the social order, in the form of which the whole is exhibited, the individual is inexorably oppressed and undermined. Furthermore, in terms of relation, individuality cannot even as such be defined or determined; it is, in fact, nonexistent in society. Likewise, if we had a language for individuality, society could not as such be defined or determined. The solution, on this contradiction, is either-or. 7

8 Contents Foreword... 4 Summary... 5 Abstract Introduction Vademecum: Method, Problem, Structure, Conclusion, and Field The Method The Problem Structure Conclusion Field and Practicality Ultimate Generality Generalization The Principle of Relation The Absolute and Infinite Series Absolute Knowledge The Ideal of Reason Self-Knowledge and Reversion Reflection of the Absolute Infinite Progress of Reason Limits of Reason Truth as Ideal of Reason The Paradigm Truth via Transformation

9 5.5 The Principle as Medium Finality as Progression Freedom of Consciousness The Ultimate Singular The Synthesis as Unity of Opposites Purposelessness Organization as Representation of the Ideal The Order of the Intellect Homo Faber Hierarchic Structure of Organization Equality vs. Authority Equality as Sovereign Master and Slave Criticism, Revolution, and Revolt Universal Individuality Organization as Scientific Enterprise Rationality via Authority Freedom of the Individual Authority and Choice Unity of the Whole The Generalization of Will The Ideal of Social Order Conclusion Bibliography

10 1 Introduction In the attempt to grasp the flow of movement, we freeze it. In movement, observed by the intellect, the moment stands still. In a sequence of events, from one moment to another, movement obtains. One segment follows another in a successive order of standstills. Inherent in movement, is causality, the manifestation of which is motion. Further, from one segment to another, movement, or the moving thing, becomes more of what it is. In becoming more of what it is, movement, or the moving thing, develops in approaching fulfillment. For example, a motion picture, from one segment to another, approaches the end scene, at which point the picture is completed. By what measure do or can we say a thing is more or less of what it is, and in becoming more of what it is, can the selfsame thing ever reach completion? We may, notably, rewind a motion picture. Does a thing ever stop moving, even if it reaches its final goal? Does movement itself ever come to an end and thus to a halt? Inherent in a notion of movement, is a notion of development and, thus, fulfillment. Given the aim of fulfillment, we aim towards a higher level of existence, i.e. a better form of life. The idea of fulfillment, or betterment in approaching fulfillment, is presupposed in our every work, industry, and organization. Society in general is based on organization in pursuit of fulfillment. The purpose is completion, or fulfillment of the goal. In assuming finality, the principle of the process is established. Even though knowingly unattainable, the paradigm is perfection. In terms of a paradigm of perfection, the process is directed through determinable stages towards the end. At the outset, the end is determined. Determination of the end is expression of authority, demanding unification in strategy. For example, in the construction of a bridge, work cannot resume in deviation from the blueprint, manifesting the idea of the bridge in detail. Every participant, as an individual, as opposed to a member of the whole, is a divergence, in pursuing his own ends in expression of his own will. Authority thus mobilizes individuals in the direction of the goal. In lieu of spontaneous movement, strategy of organization proceeds in mobilization. For agents of free will, or will as expression of individuality, cannot be expected to follow the aim of organization, without determination of a higher end, above the will of the individual. The will of the 10

11 individual is generalized in terms of the will of the whole. In approaching completion, given the aim, expression of will, without reference to the aim, inexorably deviates from the strategy. The movement of the whole, in approaching completion, thus necessitates control, as long as individuality obtains. Is the individual able to claim individuality at all within the context of the whole, wherein the will is generalized in terms of a higher aim, in advancement towards fulfillment of organizational goals? In order to fulfill the goal of organization, must individuality be sacrificed on the altar of the whole? What is the form of organization constructed through development determined by an approach towards finality? Does the form of organization in itself negate individuality? If so, how may individuality be approached and managed within the context of organization? The form of organization is shaped by its principle. With the aim of fulfillment, the principle of finality is posited. The process is directed with the aim of a realization of a final product, which constitutes a stage in the whole of the organizational process. A developmental process, thus, requires an overseer. The end is given in the beginning. The purpose of the process is a realization of the end, as given in the beginning, in determination of the goal. In order to direct the process towards the end, the idea of the thing to which is aspired is imagined or exhibited in completion, as an ideal. In seeing the thing in the form of the idea, the process of materialization is over-seen and directed from a higher ground. Only from a superior position can one truly see things for what they are and see everything, not when one has to peer upward from below, through a narrow opening. (Hegel 1988:5-6) This is the first premise of authority: To observe from a superior position. The actor approaches a thing from a limited perspective, in terms of the situation at hand, by virtue of his skill, profession, or expertise, viz. from below. From a higher ground, however, the observer is positioned to lead and manage the process, in directing the process towards the end as determined in the beginning. Given the model, in terms of which the idea is exhibited as the end, construction of the thing may commence, with the aim of a manifestation of the idea. The realization of the idea is the thing, i.e. the 11

12 end product. In a sequence of determinable stages, each of which involves a sequence of events, the thing is produced as a reflection the original notion. The process is the ascending path of the origin towards the final objective. The one who already stands at the summit directs the process. In every process, although we may be ignorant of the result, surprised or disappointed by it, we expect it, with reference to a reason, known or unknown. We may not be able to predict the result, and the result itself may be unpredictable, but, in any case, it is expected. We understand the world, and we construct our world, in terms of this notion of movement, expressed in our expectation. In accordance with our expectation, we intervene in the natural cycle, in creating our own world. In order to achieve a certain result, we determine the result beforehand and advance towards it by means within our power; and, further, to achieve this result with regularity, we establish a system. When a result undetermined, seemingly impossible, even unthinkable, is determined beforehand and then shown to obtain, thus altering reality, a discovery is made, and, if considered an improvement, a world is then made on the basis of this discovery, once a system has been established in order to generate the results of this discovery. Prior to a known ability to use and control, and eventually kindle, the fire, as is in itself a system, the benefits of fire are initially imagined, in determining its results anew, in opposition to the prevailing perception of its extreme menace. Man thus approaches the fire, antecedently perceived as the enemy, thus avoided, and begins utilizing it for warmth, cooking, protection, war, torture, and execution, most specifically. By utilization of nature, thus in elevating himself above nature, man establishes a system of his own making and develops therefrom. A system of intelligent design is, in essence, preservation of knowledge and know-how. In the development of man, knowledge and know-how, however, including the system of symbols, i.e. language, applied for the storage of information and communication, is not invulnerable to the rise and fall of civilizations, cultures, and empires. As society may itself progress by reason of human ingenuity, man-made innovative systems arise or decline more or less in proportion to the fluctuating degree of societal progression or regression. Society is, notably, in itself a system. The social order is, furthermore, the system on which all 12

13 other systems of the intellect are based. In a revolution of the social order, succeeded by societal progression or regression, basic systems of survival and forms of life, e.g. use and control of fire, the sowing of the seed, and domestication of plants and animals, seem to endure social change and transformation relatively unchanged, once in place. Other systems, however, founded on a broader generalization of nature and reality, e.g. the system of a religious order and the system of scientific method, may be transformed through social revolution, and they may themselves as well transform the social order through their own revolution. In terms of linear or circular development, the process seemingly discontinues at the moment of revolution. However, as a result of revolution, a new beginning ensues; yet the new refers to an event that has happened before. In revolution, we choose to take and follow another path on our journey; yet we are still on the same journey, for a direction is shifted in order to continue the whole journey, to begin with. In revolution, a fundamental change is achieved; yet the thing transformed is still the same thing, and perhaps now, reinforced. What brings transformation? Granted, as a result of a fundamental change, the principle of a system is superseded by another principle, and thus a whole other system may be established. For example, as a result of an overthrow of government, another government with a fundamentally different policy, or, moreover, calling for a whole other system of government, may be established, in accordance with the demand of revolution. However, as a result of revolution, the system as such, e.g. a system of government per se, may in principle turn out to be more efficient and more powerful. Within the domain of an order of system, supersession of one principle by another maintains the principle of the system as such. In supersession of one principle by another, where one system is thereby substituted for a whole other system, the principle of a system as such is thereby affirmed and maintained. The fundamental change perpetuates, therefore, the fundamental principle of an order of system, within the same system or between different, or even opposing, systems. If so, what is the end of revolution? What is the end or purpose of development? Further, if not essentially linear or circular, and if lead from a higher ground, what is the inherent structure of development, within a system and between systems, viz. intra-relationally and inter-relationally, respectively? What is, essentially, 13

14 the inner logic of movement, or a moving thing, and what, if any, is the end sought, in terms of this logic? The problem, in the foregoing, may be thus stated: What is the inherent structure of organization, i.e. developmental systems, and what is the place of the individual within the social order of the organizational whole? Now, in organization, development has already taken shape in its continuance therefrom, in accordance with the structure of organization. The form of organization is, thus, simultaneously a question of the inherent structure of development. Notably, micro-systems and macro-systems, or the microcosm and the macrocosm, in structure and operation, may seem to have striking similarities, e.g. the structure of the atom in comparison to a solar system, and the ant colony in comparison to the hierarchic structure of human societies. Also, natural systems, organic or inorganic, and artificial systems may seem surprisingly similar in their structure. The camera, for example, in structure and operation, may be considered a replica of the eye. Can we determine a fundamental structure inherent in all systems? If so, by what approach do we determine the fundamental structure of all systems? Do we determine an objective reality of all systems; or do we, rather, observe reality in terms of our own mental construct? Our understanding of varieties of natural and artificial systems is, in any case, determined by the system itself by which we define systems, including our own social order, in the first place, namely language. The structure of organization and the structure of development are, thus, simultaneously a question of the structure of language. 14

15 2 Vademecum: Method, Problem, Structure, Conclusion, and Field In the following, the demarcated subject of this work and its various inter-related concepts and ideas shall be discussed in brief. The method, problem, and structure of this work will be expounded. Conclusions of this work will be summarized. The field of research shall, lastly, be discussed as well as the purpose of this work. 2.1 The Method. To begin, this work is not an interpretive essay; neither is it a quantitative nor a qualitative research of any kind. Thus, sources referenced in this work are not, strictly speaking, to be understood as means of a comprehensive interpretation or expression of others' views, ideas, or theories. Rather, independent thoughts and ideas are presented and constructed, to begin with, irrespective of any particular authoritative ideas or theories, but the former are then woven into the context of the latter, mostly by means of direct quoting, in view of similarity or dissimilarity, agreement or disagreement, for dynamic contextual analysis. Notably though, some authoritative ideas or theories, e.g. those of Hegel and Kuhn, are referenced to a greater degree than others and may thus be considered more essential to overall ideation, i.e. generation of ideas. The method is, in short, an independent framework of ideas presented in reply to, but not strictly based on, various authoritative ideas or theories, as contextually applicable. The purpose of reference, in terms of this method, is to set forth a critique of particular themes in authoritative ideas or theories within the context of an independent framework of ideas or elucidation of the independent framework in the light of those authoritative ideas or theories. The object of critique, on this notion, is not a whole idea or theory, but merely an idea or theory as expressed in the quote(s) at hand. Since it does not pretend to say what others say, a consequence of this method is, for example, not to state the comprehensive meaning of authoritative ideas or theories in accordance with the intent of the author in question. The quote itself is, rather, examined, as it stands. The aim is, again, not a full interpretive presentation of the view of any particular author. The view of an author is shown in direct quoting and discussed in such limited fashion, in the inter-weaving of ideas. This is the rule: The author is said 15

16 to say no more than what he can actually be shown to say. Direct quoting is, therefore, an essential part of the method here discussed. An independent framework of ideas is not a theory; nor is it in any way a presentation of a body of opinion, views, or beliefs. Rather, ideas are set forth and deliberated for the purpose of an objective philosophical examination of those ideas in themselves and further dynamic ideation. Truth is not claimed, although discussed as an idea in itself. By means of direct quotation, constructive or deconstructive ideation is contextually, dynamically, and critically extended, in presentation of certain problems at hand. In lieu of an interpretive approach, whereby certain authoritative ideas or theories are comprehensively expounded, an idea is presented for the purpose of ideation as such, with the aid of authoritative ideas or theories, where a similar or the same idea, or a different or an opposite idea, is put forth for critical analysis. Yet a critical analysis is not strictly concerned with any particular authoritative idea or theory, but, rather, ideation in itself. 2.2 The Problem. The problem with which to be dealt in this work concerns an inner structure of development, if such a structure may be determined, in natural and human organization. A structure of development may, for example, be conceived as linear or circular, but neither may explain adequately, on the one hand, the tendency for improvement or betterment, and, on the other hand, failure or collapse, in which case improvement or betterment does not obtain, viz. ascension or descension, respectively, within the context of development. Given a tendency for improvement, development seems to proceed in terms of a hierarchic structure, following an aim of fulfillment through determinable stages. We may, thus, ask: In a process of development, what is, if any, the inherent structure of movement, and, given the tendency for improvement, what is, if any, the end of development? May development even, as may seem the ultimate goal of the process, come to an end and, further, to a halt? Once development has taken shape, what is the form, or the inherent structure, of organization, based on this notion of development, and to what end does organization proceed? In organization, based on this notion of development, what is the lot of the individual as an agent of the system? Is an agent of the system, by his own will, able to claim 16

17 individuality at all? In other words, do the actors involved impel or impede development, or are they themselves rather impelled or impeded by way of development? Does the form of organization in itself deny individuals expression of their will, or are individuals, within the context of organization, by way of organizational development, able to express their will? Also, in the case of revolution, what is the result with regard to development? May development be said to be merely interrupted, transformed fundamentally from one end to another, or is revolution an integral determinant in development as such? The approach to this problem focuses extensively on an abstract notion of development, or its inherent structure, and, with regard to this notion of development, organizational development in general and more specifically, e.g. democratic procedure. The reason why this work was written, in the first place, was an observation of the conflicting relationship, or simple disunity, between the social and the individual. Put simply, the individual desires freedom, but all society can offer is a prison. Organization of the social realm invariably restricts the individual in thinking, acting, and living. In this work, the disunity of the social and the individual is expounded, and the roots of this problem are investigated. The roots of this problem are found to lie in a notion of order. This order, in essence, is a hierarchic structure, manifested in language, perceived in nature, and built upon in organization or, more generally, society. The structure of hierarchy is, notably, not necessarily an objective reality or even a mental construct, but, rather, a formulation of mentality and reality in accordance with the logic of generalization inherent in language. The construct of hierarchy, in the first chapter of this work, is found to lie in language, although this construct may as well be defined as an objective reality or a mental construct, as is in fact deliberated in succeeding chapters. Now, this notion of order generalizes the individual. The social order is based on the generalization of the individual. Thus, the individual is placed within the context of an order based on the opposing principle of individuality, namely generalization. The solution is not a resolution of the social and the individual; it is either the social or the individual. 17

18 2.3 Structure. This work is divided into four main chapters. The first chapter, Ultimate Generality, lays out the predetermined notion of a hierarchic system as represented in language, namely in a hierarchy of categories, within the context of which generalization is applied in the definition of particulars. In this context, direct quotation from Aristotle, Schopenhauer, Hegel, and Arendt is applied. The second and third chapter discuss the hierarchic structure of development in philosophical or abstract terms, in relation to scientific development. More exactly, the second chapter, Absolute Knowledge, is concerned with the idea of an ultimate end of development in realization of a final goal, in the form of a universal theory or a system of thought. For this purpose, direct quotation from Hegel is applied, although no claim is presented as to Hegel's maintaining an end state in his overall philosophy. Some themes in Hegel's work, however, may be applied in deliberation of an idea of an end state. Given an end state is possible, the problem is how an end state may be conceived or imagined. Here, a contradiction in the notion of a hierarchic order presents itself, discussed throughout this work. The third chapter, Infinite Progress of Reason, is concerned with the developmental process as such, particularly with regard to the problem of revolution. For this purpose, direct quotation from Hegel and Kuhn are dynamically applied, for on this problem, themes in Hegel's work seem to conflict with themes in Kuhn's work, and vice versa. The problem concerns the impact of revolution on the developmental process, but in the advent of scientific revolution, development may not seem a gradual or accumulative process, and thus the process of development may seem not to proceed, at least not in any strict regularity, in terms of a hierarchic order. The conclusion in the chapter, however, is the opposite, namely that revolution brings the developmental process to another level of development. The last fourth chapter, Organization as Representation of the Ideal, discusses the structure of development in terms of organization and society, on the notion that organization, at least human or intelligent organization, may be defined as a scientific enterprise, or, in other words, the work of homo faber. Organization is, further, in every form based on a system of hierarchy, within the context of which the individual, in a master-slave relationship, can neither claim individuality nor freedom. However, in organization, individuals can be mobilized in such a way that they feel free, if they are 18

19 allowed to choose within a set of alternatives, without a direct command from an authority figure. A social order of this kind is, for example, a democratic system. In the last fourth chapter, in deliberation of the above, various authors are directly quoted, e.g. Henri Bergson, Hannah Arendt, Max Stirner, and Karl Marx. For organization theory, specifically, Mary Parker Follett and Herbert Simon are the main sources of deliberation. In matters of democracy, John Rawls is the main source of deliberation. 2.4 Conclusion. The main conclusions of this work are the following. (1) In language, a predetermined notion of a hierarchic order obtains in the form of a hierarchy of categories. In terms of a hierarchy of categories, individuality cannot be defined. (2) Scientific development proceeds by way of a hierarchic order. A hierarchic order is, in fact, presupposed in scientific development, in the approach towards a final goal, attainable or unattainable, through determinable stages. (3) If an ultimate end is at all conceivable by the attainment of a final goal, it is a return to the source. Here, a contradiction is presented in the notion of a hierarchic order. The logical implications of this contradiction are deliberated at the end of the first, second, and third chapter. (4) Organization is an intelligent or scientific enterprise. (5) Organization, natural or man-made, is invariably a system of hierarchy. (6) An equal state of affairs does not lie beyond a hierarchic domain. The aim of a hierarchic order is, in principle, an equal state of affairs. A vertical structure, in the process of development, closes upon a horizontal structure, which in its essence is the ideal of a hierarchic order. (7) Organization, as a hierarchic order, seeks an equal state of affairs, by realization of which organization is most efficient and productive. The system of hierarchy seeks completion in equalization of its categories or elements. (8) The principle of hierarchy, based on the principle of relation, and the principle of individuality are irreconcilable polar opposites. (9) Organization and individuality, therefore, contradict each other, in principle. Resolution of this conflict is futile. In order to prevail, society, based on intelligent organization, must do away with individuality. In the ideal of organization, i.e. a complete equal state of affairs, the individual is nullified. (10) A social order wherein the individual feels free, although in no way veritably free, must be constructed in order to maintain and perfect the social 19

20 order as such. Democracy is such a system where the individual feels free, although the individual has in actuality adopted thereby an all-encompassing principle of authority. The overall conclusion may be stated as follows. We construct a social order in terms of a hierarchic structure wherein individuality cannot subsist as such. To maintain a social order, individuality must be undermined. The ideal of social order demands nullification of the individual. 2.5 Field and Practicality. In consideration of a field of study, this work pursues an amalgamation of philosophy and organization theory. The first three chapters establish a philosophical grounding for the reasoning on the developmental structure of organization, set forth in the fourth chapter. The notion of order in movement, by which development is defined, namely the hierarchic structure, is found to be the basis of every form of organization. As discussed in the first chapter, the hierarchic order manifests in language, in the form of generalization. This notion of order is, thus, pre-determined in language. Now, two philosophical problems arise in this notion of order, namely the problem of an ultimate end, discussed in the second chapter, and the problem of revolution, discussed in the third chapter. In the light of these deliberations, the structure of organization and the place of the individual within organization are discussed in terms of organization theory and further philosophical argumentation. What is the importance of this work, and what may be its practicality? We may, basically, ask: Is freedom of the individual an acceptable sacrifice for a safe and stable social order? If so, we may resume in construction of the prevailing paradigm of a world order now in motion. If we resume in construction of this order, we knowingly pursue an equal state of affairs in our social order, centred around the individual, in order to control the movement of the individual in such a way that the individual feels free in the domain of social order, within which the individual moves seemingly by choice. This approach is unavoidable in development of organization, but if we know the nature of organization, we may approach the construction of our social order in such a way that we are able to avoid hurdles and setbacks in this enterprise, perhaps even in such a way that we are able to leap forward, without remorse, into the future unknown. 20

ON EXTERNAL OBJECTS By Immanuel Kant From Critique of Pure Reason (1781) General Observations on The Transcendental Aesthetic To avoid all misapprehension, it is necessary to explain, as clearly as possible,

God and Reality Arman Hovhannisyan Metaphysics has done everything to involve God in the world of being. However, in case of considering Reality as being and nothingness, naturally, the metaphysical approach

1 The Slave Mentality: Morality of Spirit in Hegel s Lordship and Bondage James Estaver University of Chicago 2013 Montana State University International Undergraduate Philosophy Conference Montana State

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Exploration is a process of discovery. In the database exploration process, an analyst executes a sequence of transformations over a collection of data structures to discover useful

Aquinas on Essence, Existence, and Divine Simplicity Strange but Consistent In the third question of the Summa Theologiae, Aquinas is concerned with divine simplicity. This is important for him both theologically

QUESTION 37 The Person of the Holy Spirit: The Name Love Next we have to consider the name Love (amor). On this topic there are two questions: (1) Is Love a proper name of the Holy Spirit? (2) Do the Father

QUESTION 60 An Angel's Love or Affection We next have to consider the act of the will, which is love, i.e., affection (amor sive dilectio). For every act of an appetitive power stems from love, i.e., affection.

Michael Lacewing Descartes arguments for distinguishing mind and body THE KNOWLEDGE ARGUMENT In Meditation II, having argued that he knows he thinks, Descartes then asks what kind of thing he is. Discussions

Michael Lacewing Descartes rationalism Descartes Meditations provide an extended study in establishing knowledge through rational intuition and deduction. We focus in this handout on three central claims:

Hegel s Trinitarian Claim G. W. F. Hegel is one of the greatest thinkers of the Greek-Western trinitarian tradition. He said that the theologians of his day had effective ly abandoned the doctrine of the

Re-Definition of Leadership and Its Implications for Educational Administration Daniel C. Jordan Citation: Jordan, D. (1973). Re-definition of leadership and its implications for educational administration.

UNIT 1: RATIONALISM HANDOUT 5: DESCARTES MEDITATIONS, MEDITATION FIVE 1: CONCEPTS AND ESSENCES In the Second Meditation Descartes found that what we know most clearly and distinctly about material objects

Hume on identity over time and persons phil 20208 Jeff Speaks October 3, 2006 1 Why we have no idea of the self........................... 1 2 Change and identity................................. 2 3 Hume

Frege s theory of sense Jeff Speaks August 25, 2011 1. Three arguments that there must be more to meaning than reference... 1 1.1. Frege s puzzle about identity sentences 1.2. Understanding and knowledge

QUESTION 15 God s Ideas Now that we have considered God s knowledge, we have to consider His ideas. On this topic there are three questions: (1) Are there divine ideas? (2) Is there more than one divine

Michael Lacewing The ontological argument St Anselm and Descartes both famously presented an ontological argument for the existence of God. (The word ontological comes from ontology, the study of (-ology)

Kant on Time Diana Mertz Hsieh (diana@dianahsieh.com) Kant (Phil 5010, Hanna) 28 September 2004 In the Transcendental Aesthetic of his Critique of Pure Reason, Immanuel Kant offers a series of dense arguments

The Philosophical Importance of Mathematical Logic Bertrand Russell IN SPEAKING OF "Mathematical logic", I use this word in a very broad sense. By it I understand the works of Cantor on transfinite numbers

J. T. M. Miller, Department of Philosophy, University of Durham 1 Methodological Issues for Interdisciplinary Research Much of the apparent difficulty of interdisciplinary research stems from the nature

Research Methodology source: Best and Kahn (2006) and Litosseliti (2010) Human beings are the unique product of their own creation and evolution. In contrast to other forms of animal life, their highly

Some key arguments from Meditations III-V I. THIRD MEDITATION: The existence of God A. Cosmological proof of the Existence of God In the 3rd Meditation, Descartes attempts to prove that God (i) exists,

Aquinas Third Way Last time we had arrived at the following provisional interpretation of Aquinas second way: 1. 2. 3. 4. At least one thing has an efficient cause. Every causal chain must either be circular,

Full Time Master of Science in program Core concepts and disciplinary foundations of the courses Specialization Courses during the adaptation phase (Pre-Master) Deep Dive Business Strategy Managerial Economics

1/9 Locke 1: Critique of Innate Ideas This week we are going to begin looking at a new area by turning our attention to the work of John Locke, who is probably the most famous English philosopher of all

Perspectives on Computer Intelligence Can computers think? In attempt to make sense of this question Alan Turing, John Searle and Daniel Dennett put fourth varying arguments in the discussion surrounding

Chapter 15 Social Contract 15.1 Homework Readings EMP 10, RTD 6, SLB 15 Study Questions : 1. What would be our lives in a state of nature according to Hobbes? 2. What are the four basic facts about the

QUESTION 110 How Angels Preside over Corporeal Creatures The next thing we have to consider is how angels preside over corporeal creatures. On this topic there are four questions: (1) Are corporeal creatures

Inner sense and time Ralf M. Bader Merton College, University of Oxford 1 Introduction According to Kant, inner and outer sense have different forms. Whereas space is the form of outer sense, time is the

Honours programme in Philosophy Honours Programme in Philosophy The Honours Programme in Philosophy offers students a broad and in-depth introduction to the main areas of Western philosophy and the philosophy

Descartes Meditations Module 3 AQA Meditation I Things which can be called into Doubt Descartes rejects all his beliefs about the external world because they are doubtful and he wants to find a foundation

Page 1 PHILOSOPHY General Major I. Depth and Breadth of Knowledge. A. Will be able to recall what a worldview is and recognize that we all possess one. B. Should recognize that philosophy is most broadly

Reality in the Eyes of Descartes and Berkeley By: Nada Shokry 5/21/2013 AUC - Philosophy Shokry, 2 One person's craziness is another person's reality. Tim Burton This quote best describes what one finds

Bergson Class Notes 1/30/08 Time and Free Will (Chapter 2) Reiterations The basic principle is that one should not think of the properties of the process by means of the properties of the product In general:

Living without Sense and Use? Theses towards a Representationalist Account of Meaning These theses aim at a systematic account of meaning. Some of the (bold) theses made on language and mind, and the ontological

Nowhere Man Charles W. Johnson PHIL4780: Kant and Transcendental Idealism 18 March 2002 Language, Concepts, and Geach s Argument against Abstraction When in the course of human events we are called upon

Humberto Maturana Romesín American Society for Cybernetics 2008 Wiener Medalist Comments on the Occasion of this Award First of all I wish to thank you for the distinction that you wish to bestow on me.

Appendix A: Science Practices for AP Physics 1 and 2 Science Practice 1: The student can use representations and models to communicate scientific phenomena and solve scientific problems. The real world

1 Summary of Meditations III-V I. THIRD MEDITATION: The existence of God A. Cosmological proof of the Existence of God In the 3rd Meditation, Descartes attempts to prove that God (i) exists, (ii) is the

The Slate Is Not Empty: Descartes and Locke on Innate Ideas René Descartes and John Locke, two of the principal philosophers who shaped modern philosophy, disagree on several topics; one of them concerns

The completed drawing By Anette Højlund How does form come into existence? This is one of the questions behind the title of my PhD thesis, which reads, How does drawing imagine the world? The idea of the

Amy LeClair Ashley Mears Mia Serban Melissa Velez The Elementary Forms of Religious Life and The Division of Labor in Society In Elementary Forms of Religious Life and The Division of Labor in Society,

Proceedings from the 2005 Sho Sato Conference in Honor of Takao Tanase Comments on Professor Takao Tanase s Invoking Law as Narrative: Lawyer s Ethics and the Discourse of Law Norman Spaulding Stanford

Michael Lacewing Substance dualism A substance is traditionally understood as an entity, a thing, that does not depend on another entity in order to exist. Substance dualism holds that there are two fundamentally

August 2007 Ten Steps to Comprehensive Project Portfolio Management Part 3 Projects, Programs, Portfolios and Strategic Direction By R. Max Wideman This series of papers has been developed from our work

Postgraduate Journal of Aesthetics, Vol. 1, No. 1, April 2004 HEIDEGGER AND METAPHYSICAL AESTHETICS RUFUS DUITS UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON Heidegger s most precise and extensive treatment of art is to be

Introduction Descartes Proof of the External World In order to fully overcome the doubts of Meditation I Descartes had to show, in Meditation VI, that he could be certain of the existence of the material

A Guide to Curriculum Development: Purposes, Practices, Procedures The purpose of this guide is to provide some general instructions to school districts as staff begin to develop or revise their curriculum

Descartes Fourth Meditation On human error Descartes begins the fourth Meditation with a review of what he has learned so far. He began his search for certainty by questioning the veracity of his own senses.

WHAT THINKING ABOUT LANGUAGE TELLS US ABOUT FILIP KAWCZYNSKI THE UNIVERSE? WHAT THINKING ABOUT LANGUAGE TELLS US ABOUT THE UNIVERSE? What do you mean by thinking about language? I mean PHILOSOPHY of language

INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ON AUDITING 200 OBJECTIVE AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES GOVERNING (Effective for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after December 15, 2005. The Appendix contains

ART A. PROGRAM RATIONALE AND PHILOSOPHY Art education is concerned with the organization of visual material. A primary reliance upon visual experience gives an emphasis that sets it apart from the performing

DIFFICULTIES AND SOME PROBLEMS IN TRANSLATING LEGAL DOCUMENTS Ivanka Sakareva Translation of legal documents bears its own inherent difficulties. First we should note that this type of translation is burdened

How to Interpret and make the most of Belbin Team/Group Reports Belbin Team/Group reports can be used for a variety of reasons, including (but not restricted to): Helping to form a new team Understanding

The Nature of Mind by David M. Armstrong (1926- ) Armstrong s Goal Armstrong interprets mental states as causes of behavior. (like Dualists) He also believes that mental states are linked to behavior (

1. Which of the following best describes a paradigm? A. A worldview B. A research methodology C. A theory D. An argument 2. Which of the following people coined the term "paradigm shift"? A. Thomas Kuhn

Aporia vol. 24 no. 1 2014 Conceptual Parallels Between Philosophy of Science and Cognitive Science: Artificial Intelligence, Human Intuition, and Rationality Research in the cognitive sciences is founded

How does the problem of relativity relate to Thomas Kuhn s concept of paradigm? Eli Bjørhusdal After having published The Structure of Scientific Revolutions in 1962, Kuhn was much criticised for the use